Gulf Flare‑Up Enters Third Week as Iran Calls on Muslim States and Strikes Hit US Bases

The US‑Iran‑Israel confrontation entered its 18th day as Iran publicly urged Islamic states to back it and the IRGC claimed missile-and-drone strikes on US air bases in the Gulf. Baghdad's Green Zone was again targeted, US embassy defences intercepted an aerial threat, and mixed diplomatic signals suggest both back‑channel approaches and escalating military rhetoric.

Close-up of a hand holding a small Israeli flag with American flag blurred in the background.

Key Takeaways

  • 1Iran called on Islamic countries to support its resistance against the US and Israel and appointed Mohsen Rezaei as a military adviser.
  • 2The IRGC claimed combined missile and drone strikes on hangars at Bahrain's Sheikh Isa and the UAE's Al Dhafra air bases; US assessments are pending.
  • 3US embassy air defences in Baghdad intercepted an aerial threat during a second attack on the Green Zone in one night.
  • 4Reports of direct textual contact between Iranian and US envoys were published and denied; President Trump said negotiations had been sought but remained unclear.
  • 5Iranian officials released large casualty and damage figures for civilian deaths and more than 61,000 damaged civilian facilities, which would complicate de‑escalation if verified.

Editor's
Desk

Strategic Analysis

The conflict is now asymmetric and diffuse: Tehran is using missiles, drones and proxy pressure to strike US and allied assets beyond its borders, while Washington and Israel employ airpower and economic pressure to degrade Iranian capabilities. Iran's public call for Muslim states to take sides is a strategic move to internationalise its narrative and pressure Gulf governments that rely on US security guarantees. Simultaneously, Tehran's unusual internal messaging about institutional continuity suggests it is trying to inoculate itself against elite fragmentation and signals that its leadership is preparing for protracted confrontation. For international actors the dilemma is stark: more force risks wider war and economic shocks, while restraint could embolden further Iranian operations. Western and Gulf capitals must therefore calibrate responses that protect assets and shipping without providing Tehran a pretext to expand hostilities, all while pursuing discreet channels that could lock in a ceasefire before the battlefield logic spirals out of control.

NewsWeb Editorial
Strategic Insight
NewsWeb

The military confrontation between the United States, Israel and Iran entered its 18th day as Tehran publicly appealed to Islamic countries to back its resistance against what it called US‑Israeli aggression. Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) reported missile-and-drone strikes on hangars at two US air bases in the Gulf, while American air defences over Baghdad's Green Zone intercepted an aerial threat aimed near the US embassy.

Iranian state outlets said the IRGC Navy struck hangars at Bahrain's Sheikh Isa air base and the United Arab Emirates' Al Dhafra base, claiming damage to multiple facilities and warning civilians to stay away from military sites. Washington has not released detailed damage assessments, and the attribution of some attacks in the theatre remains contested, but the claims mark a rhetorical and kinetic escalation in attacks on forward US installations.

At home, Tehran's official media carried personnel and institutional moves: the appointment of former IRGC commander Mohsen Rezaei as a military adviser and a written order — using the phraseology of a 'late' supreme leader — to keep incumbent appointees in their posts. That language, unusual and politically charged, appears aimed at projecting continuity and unity inside Iran even as the country faces heavy external pressure.

Diplomatic signals have been mixed. US media reported what it called direct text exchanges between Iran's foreign minister and a US special envoy; Tehran's foreign minister denied recent contact. President Donald Trump said negotiations had been sought but remained opaque, adding that he did not expect US military action to end this week though, in his words, it would not last 'long.' He also said he would soon name countries willing to escort shipping through the Strait of Hormuz.

Israel said it struck an Iranian intelligence command centre in central Tehran in an operation intended to 'degrade' Iran's operational networks, while Iranian officials released casualty and damage tallies alleging heavy civilian losses and widespread damage to housing and commercial facilities. Tehran's spokesperson reported hundreds of civilian deaths and more than 61,000 damaged civilian structures, figures that, if accurate, would indicate extensive societal impact and complicate any efforts to de‑escalate.

The confrontation has already spilled over into neighbouring Iraq, where missiles and drones have hit the fortified Baghdad 'Green Zone' twice in one night and the US embassy's air defences activated to intercept an incoming UAV. Such attacks highlight the conflict's porous borders and the role of proxy actors and third states in widening the battlefield beyond Iran and Israel.

Why this matters is straightforward: the fighting has placed US forces and allied facilities in the Gulf at direct risk, threatened regional partners, and raised the prospect of interruptions to global energy flows and insurance for shipping. At the same time, Tehran's outreach to Islamic capitals and its messaging about institutional continuity signal a dual strategy of trying to rally regional support while stabilising domestic politics amid sustained external pressure.

What to watch next are corroborated assessments of damage at the bases Tehran alleges it hit, the pattern of strikes on diplomatic compounds and allied facilities, and any credible signs of a diplomatic back‑channel that could produce a ceasefire. Equally important will be the response of Gulf states, whose bases and airspace have been named as targets, and European and NATO reactions to US pleas for burden‑sharing in escorting commercial traffic.

The immediate trajectory remains uncertain: momentum on the battlefield has not produced a decisive outcome, and both sides retain incentives to avoid an uncontrollable regional conflagration. Nevertheless, the diffusion of strikes across sovereign territories and the public invitation to other Muslim governments to choose sides harden binary alignments and raise the risk that what began as targeted strikes could cascade into broader instability across the Middle East.

Share Article

Related Articles

📰
No related articles found